Re:South Korea has the lowest fertility rate, with lessons f...
by h0l0cube on Monday March 20, 2023 @07:02PM
(#35240082)
> They're gonna need a steady supply of troops, and having low birthrates is gonna put them in a disadvantage when war breaks out.
A cursory Googling shows that the population is ~52m in South Korea vs ~26m in North Korea
Re:South Korea has the lowest fertility rate, with lessons f...
by rs999gti on Monday March 20, 2023 @09:09PM
(#35241259)
How many of the 52m SK are men 17-49?
Wars are fought by abled bodied men and typically not women, children, and the elderly.
Re:South Korea has the lowest fertility rate, with lessons f...
by h0l0cube on Monday March 20, 2023 @09:17PM
(#35241319)
It's hard to know how demographics compare with a secretive country like North Korea, but given the scale of population difference I'd wager that for every age band they have more people, and the munitions and provisions to supply them. NK could conscript its civilians, but with such low morale caused by hunger I'm not sure they would win a war of attrition. It doesn't even seem evident that NK are interested in engaging in a 'hot' war, nor could that even be in their interests.
Re:South Korea has the lowest fertility rate, with lessons f...
by trafficante on Monday March 20, 2023 @07:16PM
(#35240223)
South Korea’s mandatory military conscription policy is exacerbating the issue.
Women (rightfully) complain that having a baby negatively impacts their careers. In South Korea, young men are required by law to spend nearly two years in compulsory military service between 18-28.
I’m honestly surprised the SK birth rate isn’t even lower.
For South Korea though, the tone deafness is just astounding here. Like they're still at war, aren't they? They're just in a cease-fire right now. They're gonna need a steady supply of troops, and having low birthrates is gonna put them in a disadvantage when war breaks out. It's a real national security concern, yet stealing public money is more important to those in power. Just wow.